It's Tru. It's Tru. It's Really Really Tru

Back in February (February 23, 2006 to be exact), The Chow Poodle and I went to Tru to celebrate my 18th birthday for the 37th time. I had never been to Tru and was very excited to finally be able to sample the food at one of Chicago's culinary landmarks. Tru is a beautiful place, decorated in a spare modernistic style. The tables are set up very far apart such that even though you are sharing the room with many strangers, you have a certain degree of privacy. Service is impeccable, if a bit on the stuffy side. The room has the ambiance of a library, with everyone speaking in hushed tones. I had the feeling that at any moment a waiter would be coming over so shush me every time I so much as laughed out loud. This is serious eating.

The Chow Poodle ordered the Grand Collection for $110 and I went with Rick Tramonto’s Collection for a $25 upcharge. Here’s what we had:

French Onion Soup Gelee (Me Only)


A grand amuse bouche followed, which was a large plate with 4 little bitty microscopic bites of different mousses/pates (sorry, no picture)

Tramonto’s Italian Black Pearl Ostera Caviar Staircase


Sautéed Main Diver Sea Scallop, Israeli Couscous, Lemon Confit, Pequillo Pepper, Chicken Jus


Peeky Toe Crab & Horseradish Salad, Roasted Baby Beets, Pickled Chard, Tarragon Coulis


Hudson Valley Foie Gras, Honeyed Berries, Braised Red Cabbage, Duck Jus (Ah…the good old days)


Black Truffle Risotto, Poached Maine Lobster, Lobster Emulsion


Roasted Atlantic Striped Bass, Melted Leeks, Mushroom & Tomato Ragout, Caramelized Onions, Beef Jus (not pictured)

Roasted Sturgeon, Braised Oxtail Ragout, Spiced Carrot Puree


Roasted Elysian Lamb Chop, Braised Shank, Golden Raisins, Pine Nut Crostini, Lamb Jus (not pictured)

Grilled Prime Beef Ribeye, Red Wine-Shallot Marmalade, Confit of Wild Mushrooms, Beef Jus


Dinner ended with a parade of desserts





All in all, everything was very good. The weakest part of the meal, to my disappointment, were the dessert courses. I had very high expectations for Gale Gand’s creations and they came up short. Not that they were bad or anything, they just weren’t transcendent. The presentation of all the food was very well done and the food was prepared very well, but nothing popped out at me as something I’ll remember for ever. Interestingly enough, though the food was delicious at the time, it is now nearly 10 months later and I really can’t recall many of these dishes at all, although I could go for a nice serving of that foie gras with berries right now.

After this meal, I decided that I had had enough of tasting menus for a while. I’d rather go into a place, pick something that I’d like to eat, and get a full serving of it to satisfy my gastro-lust. Tru, like Charlie Trotters, is a place that I was glad to have gone to, but once is enough for me.

Tru
676 N. St. Clair St.
Chicago, IL
312-202-0001

stevez wrote:Interestingly enough, though the food was delicious at the time, it is now nearly 10 months later and I really can’t recall many of these dishes at all, although I could go for a nice serving of that foie gras with berries right now.

After this meal, I decided that I had had enough of tasting menus for a while.

I always love posts like this. They always save me hundreds of dollars. As soon as I say I feel like going for a high-priced tasting menu, I read a detailed account of one and realize that I'd much rather go to Katy's Dumplings 20 times instead. The food looks great, but if you can't remember it and you're turned off of tasting menus for a while, then I don't need to get there anytime soon.

The pics are great, thanks.

Happy 18th.

Best,
Michael

Of course, $110 at Tru is pretty close to $100 at Schwa. Just a question of how much wine you drink.

Just to clarify (and if I get any of this wrong, someone please correct me)...

According to their website, Tru offers three different options for dinner: (a) their "collection" tasting menus with the specified dishes, (b) their prix fixe menu, or (c) a la carte choices from the prix fixe menu. So you aren't REQUIRED to get the tasting menu, if you would like to choose dishes for yourself.

Also, when the "collection" tasting menu says $110 (or, as it currently says on the website, $145), and the prix fixe is $95 for three courses, that is per person BEFORE tax, tip, or any beverages (alcoholic or otherwise). Whereas entrees at Schwa run $15-25 (per Metromix) so even with other courses, you would have to include tax, tip, and a fair amount of good wine (or other liquor) to reach $100 per person. (I am not commenting on the relative value of either one, just noting that it's a comparison of apples vs oranges.)

Schwa doesn't have a la carte ordering anymore. They have a 3 course and a 9 course tasting menu, for $65? and $100 respectively. Schwa is also BYOB, which is where much of the difference in cost comes, if you drink a lot of wine.

So no, it is not remotely an apple and oranges comparison to compare a $100 tasting menu at Schwa with a $110 tasting menu at Tru.

nsxtasy,

Just to clarify, my comments had nothing at all to do with the price, a factor that I never take into consideration when talking about the quality of the food as long as the food is not a complete rip off. My comments were mostly about personal preference when it comes to dining. I'm just tired of the small bites you get in a tasting menu. And yes, none of the prices included wine or tips or tax.

gleam wrote:Of course, $110 at Tru is pretty close to $100 at Schwa. Just a question of how much wine you drink.

a lot

eatchicago wrote:

gleam wrote:Of course, $110 at Tru is pretty close to $100 at Schwa. Just a question of how much wine you drink.

a lot

virtually none We barely finished a bottle of champagne over 9 courses at Schwa, so the price difference for us would have been very slight.

That said, I'd rather go to Schwa again than Tru for the first time. I somehow think the service and atmosphere at Schwa are much more my style.

gleam wrote:Of course, $110 at Tru is pretty close to $100 at Schwa. Just a question of how much wine you drink.

Also, my point wasn't that I'm opposed to all meals at this cost (obviously), but rather there are certain places I've never been (Tru, Moto, Trotter's) and the more I read accounts of meals there, the less interested I am in going.

Schwa, for some strange reason, interested me from the get-go.

eatchicago wrote:

gleam wrote:Of course, $110 at Tru is pretty close to $100 at Schwa. Just a question of how much wine you drink.

Also, my point wasn't that I'm opposed to all meals at this cost (obviously), but rather there are certain places I've never been (Tru, Moto, Trotter's) and the more I read accounts of meals there, the less interested I am in going.

Schwa, for some strange reason, interested me from the get-go.

On this point, we are in complete agreement.

Fantastic pictures, Steve (and nice post title, as well). It's Tramonto Week at LTHForum!

I have no objection to eating at Tru but somehow it has never risen to the top of my list for my next big blowout meal (and at the moment, surely Alinea is in its way). This seems to confirm, a little bit at least, my ongoing suspicion that Tru is about four-star presentation of three-star food.

Mike G wrote:This seems to confirm, a little bit at least, my ongoing suspicion that Tru is about four-star presentation of three-star food.

A perfect summary of my response to eating at Tru.

I ate at Tru several times, but not for a few years. My meals were competent, but never in the least bit memorable (with the exception of the siamese fighting fish under my tuna tartare). I've always wanted someone to explain to me why the chef feels the need to sign the "caviar" staircase. Very little of comprises the staircase is even caviar.

Mike G wrote:Fantastic pictures, Steve (and nice post title, as well).

Agree on both counts, especially the title.

I haven't been to Tru in about two years (I prefer Avenues and Alinea now), but those photos reminded me of why I loved that place.

Every dish looked incredible.

The downside is that I believe that I have had similar dishes at Tru before, which is why I now prefer the other two places. Food has got to taste great, which Tru does extremely well, but I am also looking for something a bit new, and Tru doesn't quite live up to that standard.

That being said: 20 times to a noodle place or once at Tru? I will take the Tru experience and and skip 19 meals.

DML wrote:That being said: 20 times to a noodle place or once at Tru? I will take the Tru experience and and skip 19 meals.

Well, we're all different in our styles of chowing. Maybe not 20 meals at the same spot -- but if I had the choice between one meal at a place like Tru and a meal each of

Argentine
Bosnian
Cypriot
Dominican
Ethiopian
Filipino
Guerrerense
Hungarian
Isaan
Japanese
Korean
Lithuanian
Moroccan
Puerto Rican
Romanian
Senegalese
Turkish
Uzbeki
Venezuelan
Yunnanese

I'd go for the multiple downscale meals every time. Then I'd come home and read other people's posts/pictures of their upscale visits.

Buen provecho!

Amata wrote:Maybe not 20 meals at the same spot -- but if I had the choice between one meal at a place like Tru and a meal each of

Argentine
Bosnian
Cypriot
Dominican
Ethiopian
Filipino
Guerrerense
Hungarian
Isaan
Japanese
Korean
Lithuanian
Moroccan
Puerto Rican
Romanian
Senegalese
Turkish
Uzbeki
Venezuelan
Yunnanese

I'm glad I don't have to make that choice. "I'll have the lot!"

This is a good discussion, including the ancillary aspects that we have gotten into.

Please understand that I was not quibbling with anyone's posts. I was trying to understand the comparison made between Schwa and Tru, as I have eaten at neither. Thanks for correcting me regarding the pricing at Schwa. (The $15-25/entree price I mentioned was stated in Metromix - obviously no longer applicable.) My point regarding the choices between the tasting menu vs the prix fixe vs a la carte at Tru was only to point out that the tasting menu is not the only way you can go, particularly for those who prefer to choose dishes that THEY prefer.

As for the comparison between eating at Tru once and eating at lower-cost places multiple times, it goes without saying that some places cost more than others. Some people - myself included - are willing to spend over $100 per person for a restaurant which offers food quality and creativity and a unique experience you can't find at a place at a lower price. (Maybe not every day, but at least on a special occasion.) Others are not, and don't go to such places. The nice thing about this forum is that we can advise each other on ALL kinds of food, in ALL price ranges, and each of us can decide which of the places posted appeals to us and which ones don't, whether it's because of the food, or the value, or any other reason.

I like the comments about "four-star presentation of three-star food". This is the thing I find most complex (and occasionally frustrating) in trying to evaluate restaurants to choose, based on other people's reviews. Leaving aside all the non-food aspects of the experience (which can also be important), what it comes down to, for me, is a combination of (a) choosing dishes that I like (in other words, the idea of each dish) and (b) how well the dish is prepared (i.e. the execution of each dish). Sometimes I will go to a high-end restaurant and find that the dishes on the menu (whether it's a la carte or tasting) just aren't all that appealing to me, whereas I might love offerings at another restaurant, which is criterion (a) in the previous sentence. With the very best places, this is more likely than problems with the execution; they rarely prepare food poorly. I can often - not always, but often - get an idea of how much I will like a place based on reviewing its menu on its website, and topics like this one, with photos, can be extremely helpful.

Based on the descriptions and photos in this topic, I don't think I would be overwhelmed by the dinner at Tru (and I get the same feeling from their various prix fixe items listed on their website). Not that anything listed or pictured would be bad, just that they are not the kind of dishes that jump out at me and scream, "You're going to LOVE this". Hence the aptness of the phrase, "four-star presentation of three-star food". Keep in mind that this is all about personal opinion. Your opinion may differ from mine, and the dishes at Tru may be ones that you love.

By contrast, I thought the offerings at Michael (see my report) sounded heavenly, and as it turns out, all of them were precisely that, where every bite of every dish was just pure culinary ecstasy. In my personal opinion, the food at Michael was far more appealing to me than the food shown at Tru (and again, this is all a matter of opinion and personal taste).

nsxtasy wrote:Some people - myself included - are willing to spend over $100 per person for a restaurant which offers food quality and creativity and a unique experience you can't find at a place at a lower price.

I am one of the people who is more than willing to spend money at a higher priced restaurant, but I do take exception with the idea that you can't find high quality and a unique experience at a lower-priced restaurant.

In fact, I'd argue that you're more likely to find a unique experience as you move down the price scale. As for food quality, many of the highest quality foods I've eaten in Chicago cost under $5.

Best,
Michael

eatchicago wrote:I am one of the people who is more than willing to spend money at a higher priced restaurant, but I do take exception with the idea that you can't find high quality and a unique experience at a lower-priced restaurant.

I didn't say that.

I should also note, I suspect we are not in disagreement here.

If we could get exactly the same experience at a lower-priced restaurant as at a higher-priced restaurant, then there would be no reason to spend the higher price... right? So it makes sense that there are some things we can find at a higher-priced restaurant that we can't find at lower-priced places.

This takes nothing away from the fact that there are many places offering different high quality and unique experiences at lower prices. Even among those of us who enjoy the splurge places, don't we all eat at lower priced places far more often?

eatchicago wrote:In fact, I'd argue that you're more likely to find a unique experience as you move down the price scale.

I think that depends on your definition of the word "unique". How many places offer a similar experience to Tru? How many places offer a similar experience to your neighborhood hamburger joint?

eatchicago wrote:As for food quality, many of the highest quality foods I've eaten in Chicago cost under $5.

Under $5? That's pretty difficult. At a lot of places, you can't even get a burger for $5. If you had said $15, different story...

But getting back to your main point, on which I think we agree, I don't associate price with quality. I associate what I think tastes great with quality. Which is why I've been disappointed paying $200+ pp for food from Grant Achatz, and thrilled paying a third that amount for food from Michael. (I can think of plenty more such examples, including lower-priced places that I frequent often and don't reserve for special occasions.)

Under $5? That's pretty difficult. At a lot of places, you can't even get a burger for $5. If you had said $15, different story...

You may not have seen this:
http://lthforum.com/bb/viewtopic.php?t=3664&highlight=lunch

nsxtasy wrote:

eatchicago wrote:I am one of the people who is more than willing to spend money at a higher priced restaurant, but I do take exception with the idea that you can't find high quality and a unique experience at a lower-priced restaurant.

I didn't say that.

Sorry, I must have mis-read. (scratches head)

nsxtasy wrote:I should also note, I suspect we are not in disagreement here.

I suspect the same.

nsxtasy wrote:

eatchicago wrote:As for food quality, many of the highest quality foods I've eaten in Chicago cost under $5.

Under $5? That's pretty difficult. If you had said $15, different story...

The crispy fish tacos at Tacos del Pacifico were about two bucks (i think) and among the best things I've eaten in Chicago. A small order of rib tips at some of the best BBQ places in town is less than five bucks and excellent. How much is a (perfect) hot dog at Gene and Judes? The reigning champ: The Issan sausage at Sticky Rice is two bucks and probably one of the highest-quality hand-made items in town. I could go on and on and on....

But getting back to your main point, on which I think we agree, I don't associate price with quality.

We do agree. And thanks to stevez, Tru dropped further down on my "restaurants to try" list.

Best,
Michael

I think the thing is, we're talking about two kinds of establishments that are fundamentally in different businesses.

At the high end, you have money to spend and a vast basis of scientific and artistically accomplished culinary expertise to draw on. In the hands of a fine chef, that results in exceptional "handmade" food, each morsel with a great amount of thought and effort devoted to it. In the hands of a not so fine one, it results in a regression to the mean of boringly acceptable so-called fine dining dishes turned out by interchangeable CIA grads moving from one Hyatt to the next.

At the low end, you're counting every penny but you have a great basis of traditional ethnic techniques and folkways which have evolved ways of making magic out of inexpensive and often leftover ingredients. When it all works right it's marvelous. But the temptation of money- and time-saving shortcuts off the foodservice truck, or the turnover of staff who don't all have equal skills, means that your $5 more often buys mediocrity than excellence, which is why this board is here to help you track the best ones down.

I've had wow experiences under both scenarios, but for completely different reasons-- to grossly oversimplify, but not completely wrongly, in the former because someone like Michael Carlson invents something new, in the latter because someone like Mr. Red Shirt at Katy's resists the temptation to make things the new, easier way.

I personally have had a lot of bad meals at cheap restaurants. Just because a place serves Ethiopian food doesn't mean that it tastes good, and it often means that it does not use the best ingredients.

That's the joy of Tru: Great materials in master hands. I have had about six meals there and thoroughly enjoyed every one.

Moreover, you have to remember that a proper meal should be a progression. Sure a course or two may not be spectacular, but the meal in its entirety still be spectacular.

Looking back, I'm sure I've had a few uninspired courses at Tru. But I have yet to have an uninspired meal. Pass on that experience? No way.

Mike G wrote:I think the thing is, we're talking about two kinds of establishments that are fundamentally in different businesses.

At the high end, you have money to spend and a vast basis of scientific and artistically accomplished culinary expertise to draw on. In the hands of a fine chef, that results in exceptional "handmade" food, each morsel with a great amount of thought and effort devoted to it. In the hands of a not so fine one, it results in a regression to the mean of boringly acceptable so-called fine dining dishes turned out by interchangeable CIA grads moving from one Hyatt to the next.

At the low end, you're counting every penny but you have a great basis of traditional ethnic techniques and folkways which have evolved ways of making magic out of inexpensive and often leftover ingredients. When it all works right it's marvelous. But the temptation of money- and time-saving shortcuts off the foodservice truck, or the turnover of staff who don't all have equal skills, means that your $5 more often buys mediocrity than excellence, which is why this board is here to help you track the best ones down.

I've had wow experiences under both scenarios, but for completely different reasons-- to grossly oversimplify, but not completely wrongly, in the former because someone like Michael Carlson invents something new, in the latter because someone like Mr. Red Shirt at Katy's resists the temptation to make things the new, easier way.

I agree with about 95 percent of what you say.

The other 5 percent is that it sounds like you value creativity more than quality (based on your comment about "interchangeable CIA grads"), whereas my personal preference is the reverse. If I had a choice between dishes that are more unusual and taste okay but not WOW, vs dishes that are more conventional but taste WOW, I will go for the wow every time. (Obviously, the ideal would be creativity AND quality, but...)

I'd just like to pop into this thread to note that I have long wondered where Gale Gand's reputation comes from. I have had her desserts at Trio, Tru, Brasserie T and most recently Osteria via Tramato. The desserts have always been the weakest part of the meal. I agree that Tramato's food is three star stuff in a four star setting, but I've just never had anything memorable, much less transcendent, from Gale Gand.

Jonah

Jonah wrote:I have long wondered where Gale Gand's reputation comes from.

I think it may be from her playful presentations. I remember a dessert at Trio with a handprint of sauce. Yes, it looked different, so if creativity was what you crave, it scored points. But I'll take any dessert at Oceanique over anything I've had from Gail Gand...

It is amazing how much Tru-bashing is going on here.

The place is a first class experience and it has been since it opened. I just don't understand the hostility.

I'd have to agree. I'm not sure I have the palate to say whether Tramonto is a 3- or 4-star chef, but Gand's desserts have always left me wondering "where the beef is", so to speak.

DML wrote:It is amazing how much Tru-bashing is going on here.

The place is a first class experience and it has been since it opened. I just don't understand the hostility.

I don't see anything of the kind in this topic! In addition to the specific references to Tru, it strikes me as more of a discussion of just what constitutes "greatness" in dining, which is relevant to this particular establishment. And of course, this is entirely a matter of opinion. Your opinion of Tru is clearly favorable. You are apparently frustrated because others don't share your opinion, some about Tru, some about "greatness". I long ago realized that things that I find truly impressive and thrilling may leave others totally cold.

Regardless, there is no better way to convey what a restaurant has to offer than by describing the experience, especially with photos, and that's what this topic does very well. After reading these descriptions, different people have different reactions; some are enticed with an increased desire to try Tru, while others may be more inclined choose to go elsewhere.

It's also worth noting that you can have "a first class experience" at a restaurant but still have it suffer by comparison with other restaurants. Sometimes this results from differences in personal priorities. One place may excel in creativity, while another excels in great tasting food, and another excels in its unique decor, and still another excels in service. And those folks who place a higher priority on one of these characteristics may not be overwhelmed by a place that excels elsewhere.

The relatively high price of a splurge meal makes the decision that much more important. (I feel a lot more regret when I'm not impressed by a $200/pp dinner than one costing a tenth as much.)

Remember what they say - "Different strokes for different folks."